Digital mining operation sued by North Tonawanda neighbors
Bennett Loudon//April 16, 2026//
A federal lawsuit seeking class-action status has been filed by a group of North Tonawanda residents against the operators of a cryptocurrency mining operation.
The complaint was filed against Digi Power X Inc. earlier this month in U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York. The New York City law firm of Weitz & Luxenberg PC represents the three named plaintiffs.
The complaint accuses Digi Power of being a private and public nuisance, negligence, and negligent infliction of emotional distress. The complaint seeks monetary and punitive damages.
“For years, the town’s residents, including plaintiffs, enjoyed the peace and quiet traditionally characteristic of their community,” according to the suit.
In early 2021, Miami-based Digi Power purchased a defunct gas power plant at 1070 Erie Ave., and, since then, has installed thousands of computers to solve complex math puzzles to obtain cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin.
“Since at least September 2022, defendant’s mining computers have operated and continue to operate nearly 24 hours a day, seven days a week,” according to the complaint.
To prevent the computers from overheating, Digi Power uses massive industrial-grade fans that run day and night without interruption.
“These fans produce a loud, droning, and persistent noise – including low-frequency sound that manifests like vibrations – that can be heard and felt throughout plaintiffs’ properties,” the suit claims.
Before Digi Power started operating, the plaintiffs “could comfortably enjoy outdoor activities, view wildlife, rest in their homes without disturbance, and experience nighttime quiet consistent with the area’s rural and residential character,” according to the complaint.
“After defendant commenced its mining operations, however, the character of the neighborhood changed dramatically. The non-stop noise and vibrations generated by defendant’s mining operations are pervasive, inescapable, and unbearable. They interfere with plaintiffs’ ability to sleep, hold conversations, relax indoors and outdoors, or otherwise use and enjoy their property,” the suit claims.
“The plaintiffs have suffered and continue to suffer substantial annoyance, emotional distress, loss of comfort and enjoyment, diminution in the value of their property, and an increased risk of adverse health effects,” the suit claims.
Digi Power uses large industrial fans or ventilation systems to prevent computers from overheating. The fans and cooling equipment necessary produce constant and significant levels of noise and vibrations, according to the suit.
“The sound typically includes a high-pitched whine and steady mechanical hum associated with the continuous operation of hundreds or thousands of high-speed computer fans and external industrial cooling fans,” according to the complaint.
Mining operations also generate low-frequency noise and physical vibrations that are felt in the body, according to the complaint.
The proposed class would include all individuals who have lived or owned property within three miles of Digi Power’s facility from 2021 to the present. According to the complaint, there are thousands of potential class members.
The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction “to abate the nuisance in a manner to be determined by experts.”
“Plaintiffs further seek injunctive relief to establish a medical monitoring protocol for class members to monitor their health and diagnose, at an early stage, any ailments associated with exposure to noise at the intensity and character of that emitted by the facility,” according to the suit.
Digi Power X did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
[email protected] / (585) 232-2035
Related Articles
Related Articles
Case Digests
- Second Circuit – Long-arm jurisdiction: Northwell Health Inc. v. Group Hospitalization and Medical Services Inc.
- Fourth Department – Motor vehicle accident: Thurston v. Howard
- Western District Case Notes
- Fourth Department – Disclosure: People v. Smith
- Second Circuit – Petition for bail: Fulton v. Mullin
- Fourth Department – Breach of lease agreement: Three Buds, LLC v. NCTBP Calabrese LLC
- Second Circuit – Expert testimony: Rutledge v. Walgreen Co.; Phippen v. Walgreen Co.
- Second Circuit – Congestion pricing: County of Rockland v. Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Auth.
- Fourth Department – Apartment search: People v. Shaw
- Fourth Department – Vicarious liability: Sarah R. v. Crouse Health Hospital
- Fourth Department – Waiver of indictment: People v. Schindler
Law News
- New trial granted for defendant unhappy with their attorney
- NY appellate court reinstates medical malpractice case
- NY appeals court reinstates slip-and-fall lawsuit
- Charter Communications must pay penalty for retaliation against employee
- Webster resident named to lead national court reporter group
- NY appeals court affirms rape conviction, rejects speedy trial claim
- Telesca Center for Justice gets $90,000 in state funding
- Trevett Cristo P.C. celebrates 100th anniversary




